Schapelle Corby - Innocent or Guilty?

[ColB]

Originally posted by Purple

'...For starters, I am of the opinion that that this episode has nothing to do with drug trafficking, and nothing to do with drug traffickers.

If that hasn't dawned on you as at least being a possibility, well, I guess you haven't paid attention to the details.

"...I wonder if we'll ever get to learn the truth of this tale. I strongly suspect that pretty much everything that's been published, asserted, testified and speculated is false.

Much of the evidence has alas long since been disposed of, and the backsides of those who manifestly failed in their duty long since covered..."

Nothing to do with drug trafficking or traffickers Purple!! Enlighten us with your insight as to what 'this episode' is all about.

Given your assertion that pretty much everything that has been 'published, asserted, testified and speculated is false' and that 'we haven't paid attention to the details' I'm just wondering how we or you are able to come to any sort of conclusion about her guilt or otherwise.

We all look forward to your words of wisdom.

 

[pilots]

Zack, happy new year to you and your family.
I have been reading some of the dribble on the Corby Web site, this bit intrigues me, under the freedom of info act DR Adrian Bradford found out that a South American plane was on the ground at Sydney air port with a load of Illegal drugs at the same time that Corby was in Sydney..
Now tell me could we have had a shipment get mixed up??

 

[Calliope]

lol -
Tell you what Calliope - If I stuck you and slim on ignore for 2009, I reckon I wouldn't miss too many gems of wisdom.

OK go and sulk:hide:. Your problem is that you can't face up to the truth.

 

[slim pickins]

Zack, happy new year to you and your family.
I have been reading some of the dribble on the Corby Web site, this bit intrigues me, under the freedom of info act DR Adrian Bradford found out that a South American plane was on the ground at Sydney air port with a load of Illegal drugs at the same time that Corby was in Sydney..
Now tell me could we have had a shipment get mixed up??

thats interestng and not something i've heard before. there could be a possibility someone did plant the drugs there. 5kg of pot...... 5 kg is quite heavy.

suppose someone says to you.... take this bag of drugs, 5kg, and deliver it to another country. oh and if you lose the drugs..... i will kill you.

so you find a boogie board bag that is going to bali...... or well... you arent quite sure where its going. becasue its the airport and they misdirect bags all the time. anyway you put it in someones bag and hope it goes where you are going and you plan to steal it back off them later and deliver it to where it should be going.

now suppose you put your 5kg of drugs into my bag and me being a pretty astute person i see that i have an extra 5kg of drugs.... well i go to the police immediately and say... yes i have somehtign to declare....... i jsut found 5 kg of drugs. you lose your drugs, you get kileld by your boss for being so stupid and i walk away free.

now would you do that. would you really bet all your money and possibly your life that i will be an airhead and miss a 5kg bag of drugs? and you dont even know who owns the bag!

NO you will strap the drugs to you. protect those drugs like your life depended on it.

people kill people to make sure others dont get their hands on their drugs. are such people going to essentially just hand over drugs to someone that might just realise it and give them to the cops.

is there a drug trafficker on here that could give us an insight. if not..... maybe such drug trafficers have already been killed by their boss.

and as for scott rush being threatened by a gun to carry drugs.... please... if they did that to me.... id get to the airport and say.... excuse me.... before i pass customs.... would you please take these drugs off me. that man over there held a gun to my head and said i have to take this on the plane. bingo... you will get a medal of godo citizenship for your deeds and sell your story to "new idea" or "a current affair"

 

[ZackW]

Oh, and ZackW: I share your concern, but slagging off at the Indonesian justice system is misconceived. They have their duty to perform, and that they did. They can be accused of being unsympathetic, but sympathy isn't what they're there for. One could suggest they were predictable.

Predictable - to some degree. But that can never make gross abuse of human rights acceptable. The list of abuses in this case is long enough to be considered systematic.

In fact their nature seems to be illustrated by the activities of their proxy on this very forum. Monitoring it and then making foul threats against her on the basis of a stranger posting here are not the activities of a civilized regime.

But that is only the start. The activities of the Australian government, media and some of the Australian people are equally obscene.

It was the Australian government and media who were/are responsible for this:


It is the Australian media that have hidden the global protest from the people:


It is many Australian people like some of those above who have allowed themselves to lose sight of the realities like the political/racist sentence, the missing CCTV tapes, the burning of the evidence, and the rest.

Much of the evidence has alas long since been disposed of, and the backsides of those who manifestly failed in their duty long since covered.

I agree. The parties involved in this (politicians, media, the AFP, and others) have covered their tracks carefully. But there ARE still people in those organizations who know - and we can only hope they come forward.

In the meantime, Schapelle Corby suffers horribly, year after year: something which some sick minds on here seem to relish.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Predictable - to some degree. But that can never make gross abuse of human rights acceptable. The list of abuses in this case is long enough to be considered systematic.

In fact their nature seems to be illustrated by the activities of their proxy on this very forum. Monitoring it and then making foul threats against her on the basis of a stranger posting here are not the activities of a civilized regime.

But that is only the start. The activities of the Australian government, media and some of the Australian people are equally obscene.

It was the Australian government and media who were/are responsible for this:


It is the Australian media that have hidden the global protest from the people


It is many Australian people like some of those above who have allowed themselves to lose sight of the realities like the political/racist sentence, the missing CCTV tapes, the burning of the evidence, and the rest.




I agree. The parties involved in this (politicians, media, the AFP, and others) have covered their tracks carefully. But there ARE still people in those organizations who know - and we can only hope they come forward.

In the meantime, Schapelle Corby suffers horribly, year after year: something which some sick minds on here seem to relish.

Zack mate, this is a stock forum.

You come on here with your views.

They were listened to

They get rebuffed.

Then you whinge about this rebuttal.

You must have no wit or wherewithal to be able to cope with this.

I once visited Ireland, an island on the Western reaches of Europe.

They had a name for guys like you.

An eejit.

Not quite an idiot.

A kinder form

An eejit.



gg

 

[pilots]

Predictable - to some degree. But that can never make gross abuse of human rights acceptable. The list of abuses in this case is long enough to be considered systematic.

In fact their nature seems to be illustrated by the activities of their proxy on this very forum. Monitoring it and then making foul threats against her on the basis of a stranger posting here are not the activities of a civilized regime.

But that is only the start. The activities of the Australian government, media and some of the Australian people are equally obscene.

It was the Australian government and media who were/are responsible for this:


It is the Australian media that have hidden the global protest from the people:


It is many Australian people like some of those above who have allowed themselves to lose sight of the realities like the political/racist sentence, the missing CCTV tapes, the burning of the evidence, and the rest.




I agree. The parties involved in this (politicians, media, the AFP, and others) have covered their tracks carefully. But there ARE still people in those organizations who know - and we can only hope they come forward.

In the meantime, Schapelle Corby suffers horribly, year after year: something which some sick minds on here seem to relish.

Zack why when you had a sample of the drugs did you not test it. What stoped you..

 

[pilots]

Predictable - to some degree. But that can never make gross abuse of human rights acceptable. The list of abuses in this case is long enough to be considered systematic.

In fact their nature seems to be illustrated by the activities of their proxy on this very forum. Monitoring it and then making foul threats against her on the basis of a stranger posting here are not the activities of a civilized regime.

But that is only the start. The activities of the Australian government, media and some of the Australian people are equally obscene.

It was the Australian government and media who were/are responsible for this:


It is the Australian media that have hidden the global protest from the people:


It is many Australian people like some of those above who have allowed themselves to lose sight of the realities like the political/racist sentence, the missing CCTV tapes, the burning of the evidence, and the rest.




I agree. The parties involved in this (politicians, media, the AFP, and others) have covered their tracks carefully. But there ARE still people in those organizations who know - and we can only hope they come forward.

In the meantime, Schapelle Corby suffers horribly, year after year: something which some sick minds on here seem to relish.

Zacko, you talk about the sick minds here, you are correct, some do have some thing wrong with them.
For starters we have this knob who keeps posting a video of seven facts when in fact, ONLY the first fact is correct.
Then when you ask this this knob to answer why when the lawyer for the Corby's who got a sample of the drugs, did not have the drugs tested.
Now I would of had them tested at once, this would have let her off the hook if the drugs had of come from any other place than Queensland, or was it we did not test then because we all ready KNEW THAT THEY CAME FROM QUEENSLAND.
.

 

[ZackW]

gg

I am guessing you are under new orders from your Indonesian friends? Another attempt to censor free debate in Australia from that foul regime? Resorting to childlike abuse? Pathetic. Believe me, there are plenty of names for the likes of you, and your human rights abusing mates.

I prefer to deal with facts: those that you and your sordid regime and sycophants in Australia wish to hide. Watch the world: people out there aren't brainwashed as easily as so many Australians are.

Perhaps you should give up, because I won't be silenced. And take the twisted guy above who repeats the same blatant lie on every page with you.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I am guessing you are under new orders from your Indonesian friends? Another attempt to censor free debate in Australia from that foul regime? Resorting to childlike abuse? Pathetic. Believe me, there are plenty of names for the likes of you, and your human rights abusing mates.

I prefer to deal with facts: those that you and your sordid regime and sycophants in Australia wish to hide. Watch the world: people out there aren't brainwashed as easily as so many Australians are.

Perhaps you should give up, because I won't be silenced. And take the twisted guy above who repeats the same blatant lie on every page with you.

My contact in Jakarta Ms.Tingtong hs been transferred to the UK Embassy of Indonesia and now lives in Tooting, a suburb of London.

Prior to her departure she advised me you live somewhere between Lismore and Southport, areas of Australia I avoid as much as possible, due to the large numbers of bludgers who live in that space (excuse the pun)

For the first time in your life I am going to expose you to Shakespeare.

No, he is not a person waving a weapon in a theme park on the Pacific Highway, but rather the best interpreter of men's and women's emotions ever.

He was a pommie playright.

I have taken 2 liberties with his speech from Polonius.

My liege, and madam, to expostulate
What majesty should be, what duty is,
What day is day, night night, and time is time,
Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time;
Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief. Your noble lass is guilty. . . .

gg

 

[schu]

I came across this thread quite randomly when I was searching something regarding Schapelle Corby, and having read the whole thread through, I felt compelled to post. My goal is to work as a human rights lawyer. For a number of years now, I have been involved with many organisations and causes, everything from the death penalty to rape in the Congo to specific cases. Schapelle Corby is only one of those.

I first took interest in her situation with regard to the fairness of her trial and the broader context of Indonesia's legal system with respect to international standards. I did not initially concern myself with questions relating to her guilt or innocence. However, over time, with extensive research, including access to official court documents, I have become entirely convinced of her innocence.

I will try to answer some of the points raised in this thread and am happy to answer any questions that are thrown at me about the situation. I also strongly suggest that everyone posting here, with an interest, get a copy of Tony Wilson's book, Schapelle, as that is a very detailed account of everything that has transpired, with accuracy.

Schapelle never carried her boogieboard bag to the customs counter, so she could never have identified the difference in weight from what was normal. She noticed the bag sitting away from the other bags that were waiting for passengers to pick up and when she approached it, she saw that the handle had been broken. She was miffed about this because she had only just had it repaired before the trip. She also noticed that the zips were done up in a different place to where she had done them up. She was struggling with her other bags and one of her friends told James to help her. It was James who lugged the bag to the customs counter, not Schapelle.

Under the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHAP), two pieces of evidence are required for conviction. One of these was the fact that the mairjuana was found in her bag. The other was that the customs officer claimed she refused to open her bag because she said she had some marijuana. Schapelle disputes this: she says that she opened the bag for him quite willingly and reeled back at the smell (that emanated because the vacuum sealed bags had been cut) and that she only ever said that the bag was hers, not the marijuana itself; indeed that she denied that the marijuana was hers. Obviously this is a case of his word against hers. However, it is worth considering a few things. First, what person, guilty or innocent, would admit to having and owning the marijuana? That would seem a strange way to behave. Second, the custom's officer's English was incredibly rudimentary to the extent that he could barely communicate. It is perfectly plausible that he misunderstood what was said by her in terms of what she owned. He was backed up on his interpretation of events by a customs supervisor, but this supervisor was not even present when the bag was opened and did not actually witness the exchange.

Schapelle and her family were desperate to have the marijuana tested. She signed a release to allow the AFP to test the drugs. This release is in Tony Wilson's book and on record with the Australian Consulate in Indonesia and AFP; unfortunately I do not have access to a copy to attach or post online. It was the Indonesian prosecutors who refused to have the testing done, stating that it 'wasn't necessary'.

Schapelle and her family were also desperate to have the vacuum sealed bags fingerprinted. They were initially told that too many people had touched the bag so there was no point. It should also be noted that when Schapelle was arrested, a multitude of law enforcement officials handled the bags without gloves, making no attempt to preserve the evidence. Then it was discovered that there were two bags: an inner and an outer one. When they asked in open court for the inner bag to be tested, one of the judges reached across and touched the inner bag himself and said that he would 'consider it'. The request was subsequently denied.

At the very least, this raises two questions. One, why did the Indonesians specifically prevent the testing of the marijuana and the bags when to find that it was from Australia and that Schapelle's fingerprints were on the bag would have meant certain guilt? Two, if Schapelle was guilty, why would she and her family have repeatedly requested the tests?

In addition to this, Schapelle and her sister and friend, on the night she was arrested, requested that all the baggage be weighed. This was crucial. When they checked in at Brisbane airport, all the luggage was weighed and the total weight recorded on one ticket. Had they done this at the Bali end as well, the two weights could have been compared. If they were the same, the drugs were in there on check-in and she was likely guilty. But if there was a 4kg difference, the drugs were put in later, which would have raised serious doubts. The Bali authorities had no interest in doing this. Once again, why would Schapelle and her family and friends requested this if there was any chance she or they were guilty?

The Corbys also immediately requested that QANTAS and Brisbane airport provide them with security footage from the area and period in question. They did this within 72 hours and continued to do this when the footage was not forthcoming. They were originally told that it would be preserved and they would get it and then they were given all manner of reasons for not receiving it: that it was already wiped; that the cameras were being serviced; that the cameras were only on when a person of interest was going through the airport; that they needed to get permission from someone else. Eventually it was confirmed that the cameras covering the area in Brisbane airport where Schapelle's bags would have been visible were not working on the day in question. And there were no cameras on the area in Sydney airport where her baggage remained in an unlocked luggage container for several hours.

Schapelle was originally charged with only importation, but right before the trial started, they added the trafficking charge. There was no new evidence that had come to light in the intervening period to support the second charge. Furthermore, the prosecutors never presented evidence to support trafficking. During the trial, the individual who had actually drafted the drugs legislation testified that the trafficking charge required direct support and that merely importing the drugs (having them on you at the airport) didn't amount to trafficking. Yet she was still convicted on this count.

From an evidentiary perspective, the Prosecution never even came up with a suggestion of where the drugs were meant to go. In fact, they never even investigated the Corby family in Bali. If the drugs were meant to be disseminated to Schapelle's sister's family, why was this not made clear with evidence and, more to the point, why was there no attempt to even establish that was the case? A number of people involved in supplying drugs in Bali were questioned (by private individuals) and they said that if the Corbys were involved in drugs to that extent, they would have known about it, but they didn't.

Moreover, the Australian police never even investigated the Corbys. By this I mean they never even sat down to question any of them about the matter. Now, if a person in Australia is thought to be part of a drug-smuggling ring, which is the suggestion about the Corbys here, the AFP would be concerned about it. Yet they weren't concerned about the Corbys at all.

Yes, Mercedes smoked marijuana and maybe took a couple of pills over the years. But, at the end of the day, who hasn't done that or had a relative who has done that? It doesn't automatically translate that you are an international trafficker. Yes, she lied about that initially. But who wouldn't do that with a sister facing jail time? It is perfectly understandable and hardly significant. Bear in mind that she won the defamation trial against Today Tonight. Channel 7, with all their resources (apparently they spent $5 million on their defence) couldn't find a skerrick of evidence to support the claim that she was significantly involved with drugs.

Yes, Schapelle's father was fined for possession years ago. He was at a party that had marijuana and the police turned up and due to an injury he couldn't run away. This is all on record for anyone who wishes to investigate. Once again, if you looked into the history of most families, I think you would find something similar. He did have associations with people who were involved with drugs, including his neighbour, but police investigated that years ago and he was never even remotely connected to their activities. This is, once again, all on record and in fact, Queensland Police stated it publically after the ABC aired a report implicating him. I would strongly suggest that everyone in Australia has, at some point, had contact unwittingly with people associated with drugs, whether it be a neighbour, a work colleague or a friend of a friend.

continued............

 

[schu]

……………..continued

It is true that the Corbys do not come across well to the public. They are not particularly well-educated and some members of the family, such as Clinton and James, have done some dodgy things. But there would be hundreds of thousands of families with similar histories. It is just that we don't hear about them because they are not scrutinised by the media to such an extent. In the case of James, it is apparent that he broke into the house he did because he had heard that they had some connection to the drugs found in his sister's bag and was hoping to find evidence to free her. It was an utterly stupid thing to do, but that doesn't automatically translate to him being a family of drug traffickers. In fact, it suggests the opposite. And once again, the Australian police have never suggested that the Corbys are a family of traffickers, nor indeed that this incident was somehow indicative of that.

There is also the question of why anyone would import marijuana into Bali. There have been a lot of stories about the relative prices and one such is the idea that Australian pot is highly sought after in Bali due to its higher quality and would therefore fetch a higher price than in Australia. This is untrue and it has been confirmed by people in the drug trade and suppliers living in Bali. It would fetch much less in Bali than in Australia and Aceh in Indonesia has some of the world's best pot. It would be entirely uneconomical to traffic pot from Australia to Bali and totally unnecessary. It was also confirmed by a number of suppliers that they had never heard of this happening and that it was unrealistic: they wouldn't be able to maintain the supply, which would anger people. The rumours about THC content are unfounded.

To my way of thinking, all this points conclusively to Schapelle being innocent. But at the very least, it amounts to reasonable doubt. KUHAP does actually require that cases in Indonesia are proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but this standard was certainly not applied in Schapelle's circumstances. It also provides for innocent until proven guilty, but once again, this standard was not applied in Schapelle's situation. Indeed, the judges stated that she needed to prove her innocence and find evidence to support that conclusively. Irrespective of international fair trial standards, Indonesia did not actually uphold the principles and requirements of its own justice system.

In addition to this, Schapelle received a penalty far harsher than was suggested by other cases. Her penalty was actually, by far, the harshest ever for such a situation. For example, a woman who tried to import 15.22kgs of marijuana was sentenced to 15 years while another who tried to import 5+ kgs of cocaine was also sentenced to 15 years. Comparable cases to Schapelle's suggested she should only have received 3-4 years.

In Schapelle's case, there are a number of issues that are concerning from a human rights perspective. First of all, there is the specific issue of her innocence. However, second, even if you don't believe in her innocence, surely the above points raise questions about the situation and the legitimacy of the trial. Third, there are issues regarding the fairness of her trial, which also have a broader context relating to the Indonesian justice system. Fourth, there is the question of why the media has orchestrated such an enormous smear campaign full of half-truths. All of the information I have given is confirmable from official records. It is not a case of my word against anyone elses.

Schapelle's situation is just one human rights issue in the world. There are many. Not a day goes by when I don't feel the burden of the fact that there are too many to deal with. But nobody can address every single one - each one has supporters who feel that a particular issue is important and deserving of their time. It isn't a matter of one being more important than another; it is a matter of personal passion or interest. I took an interest in this one because of its complexity and the relevance to our region, just as I have an interest in others for other reasons. I wish I could address them all, but there aren't enough hours in the day.

What do I think happened with Schapelle? I have thought about that on many occasions. There are a few theories that are equally viable: that she was the inadvertent victim in a drug transportation operation involving baggage handlers; that she was set up by Bali customs to be bribed; that she was a decoy while other drugs were going through Bali airport. I can't answer with any certainty which one it is. But that is precisely the point: it isn't up to the accused to come up with conclusive evidence about what happened; it is enough to demonstrate reasonable doubt as to what happened. Which has been done in this case. And in addition to that, the Corbys actually did everything they could to prove her innocence, but were denied the ability to do that.

 

[mayk]

death penalty to rape in the Congo ......

I am really interested in knowing the nature of this case, and your analysis of it.

 

[ZackW]

You outline those aspects very well indeed Schu. Those breaches are shocking enough on there own terms, but yet another dimension is evident with respect to the Australian government.

The government KNOW that her human rights were repeatedly breached, as you eloquently point out. They KNOW her sentence was political/racist, and totally extreme compared with the norm. They KNOW that leaving her there is a green light for this and other regimes to breach the human rights of other Australians in the future.

Yet they have sacrificed all of this to maintain their strategic relationship with Indonesia.

And it gets worse when we consider the role of the media via the smear campaign, the AFP, and others. They have not only sacrificed all this, but they have been complicit in a cover up, the centre of which is that media operation.

This leads us to here: people who lack the capacity to think outside the media influence, posting foul messages, and repeating smears. We even have Mr Well-Connected-With-Jakarta grotesquely issuing vile threats against her to try to censor free speech.


It is frightening how few people can actually understand the real issues. How they have effectively become compassionless zombies repeating the output of the media operation, grasping one smear after another to try to justify human rights abuse and shocking misuse of power.

 

[chops_a_must]

Nope.

People just care more for those Australians that will be killed in other country's prisons.

In comparison to those situations, this issue is meaningless.

 

[slim pickins]

I first took interest in her situation with regard to the fairness of her trial and the broader context of Indonesia's legal system


she saw that the handle had been broken. She was miffed about this because she had only just had it repaired before the trip. She also noticed that the zips were done up in a different place to where she had done them up. She was struggling with her other bags and one of her friends told James to help her. It was James who lugged the bag to the customs counter, not Schapelle.

she says that she opened the bag for him quite willingly and reeled back at the smell (that emanated because the vacuum sealed bags had been cut) and that she only ever said that the bag was hers, not the marijuana itself;


Schapelle and her family were also desperate to have the vacuum sealed bags fingerprinted.




From an evidentiary perspective, the Prosecution never even came up with a suggestion of where the drugs were meant to go.

Moreover, the Australian police never even investigated the Corbys. By this I mean they never even sat down to question any of them about the matter. Now, if a person in Australia is thought to be part of a drug-smuggling ring, which is the suggestion about the Corbys here, the AFP would be concerned about it. Yet they weren't concerned about the Corbys at all.

Yes, Mercedes smoked marijuana and maybe took a couple of pills over the years. But, at the end of the day, who hasn't done that or had a relative who has done that?

what fariness are you talking about.... its indonesia. people are starving there. there is no fairness in indonesia.

broken handle and changed zipper position.... hmmm... better get theat through customs qucik smart and check whats inside after we pass customs.

vacum seled bag was cut and you could smell nothing whilst carrying the the bag to customs? and then the customs open the bad and you say... holly cow.... look that marijuana is not mine! well how do you know its marijuana.

it could be grass.... i wouldnt not knwo what marijuana smells like. i never tried it. she said they werent my drugs, becasue she knew the bag contained drugs. maybe becasue she put them there.

fingerprinting the bag?.. why do that?... if there are no fingerprints it means they just wiped the bag. if i was trafficing drugs i would wipe all my prints just in case i was caught.... so i could say... they arent mine.. there are no fingerprints. i would knwo there are no prints because i would have wiped them.

indonesian police dotn care where the drugs were meant to go.. they just care that they found something. its indonesia not CSI

the AFP are a bunch of morons. they couldnt find a drung ring if it fell on them. furtehrmore... there is probably a governemnt directive tellign them not to interfere in the drugs trade too much. after all if we put away all the drugies and their associates... there would be very few people to enjoy australia. ... example, ever hear on the news.... "a well known member of sydney's underworld was shot today and is recovering in the hospital" and you wonder...... if the press knows he is a crim.. why isnt he in jail.... well he isnt becasue the AFP and cops in general probably have a directive not to interfere in the drugs trade too much.

if you knwo any drug dealers etc... go to the cops and tell them everythign... where they sell drugs..who they sell it to ect... they will laugh at you whilst taking your statement. noone will touch the drug dealers.

i can go to sydney and score coke in a matter of minutes. buy a gun for $1,000 within 24 hours, and you are telling me cops cant find these people.

BTW.... as for your last statement i dont have any relatives that have even tried drugs.. and neither have i... i couldnt tell marijuana from grass clippings, coke from powdered sugar.

 

[slim pickins]

schu,

although i am no expert in police or security matters,
the "missing" security videos from brisbane and sydney airport are proably sitting on some police officers desk. selaed and classified by either the airport authority or ASIO.

they would have watched them. found them to be either damning or inconclusive and decide not to release them. either to leave an element of doubt so she avoids the death sentence. or becasue they are reluctant to show potential terrorists their airport surveilance capability. which i amsure is significant.

id say its very very high resolution, and would not be surprised if they even recorded sounds as well. maybe to pick up faint murmurings of (god is great, death to america, paradise shall be mine )

maybe its a good test.... go to the airport and repeat those words over and over again.. and watch what happens. id say you wil be tacked tot he gorund by 5 guys in oakley shades.

 

[pilots]

SCHU, some facts for you. I have lived and worked in Bali. We had up to twenty young men working for the company that I was working for, we had Men from New Zealand, America, and Australia working for us, a lot of the men did smoke pot, they told me many times that they would ONLY buy from ex pat, if you buy from a local you have a good chance you have been set up and will have to pay a bribe to a local copper who soon knocks on your door.
Now this Schu, they all said the local grass from Bali was weed, they was all ways on the look out for the imported drugs as they gave you a bigger high for your $$. (imported cost up to twenty times more)
Now Schu, you like Zacko say they would not test the drugs, first the police/customs would not release a sample for testing, at this time the Corby's was screaming blue murder about not having a sample to test. Then the remarkable happened the lawyer for the Corby's got a sample, Schu, why when they now had a sample did they not have it tested. Zacko seems to have trouble with this question as well.

 

[pilots]

Schu, you also complain that she was charged with trafficking, if she was not trafficking the dope, was for own personal use then??

 

[nulla nulla]

Caught, tried & convicted. Sentence probably reflects denial and lack of remorse. Continuous media hype does nothing to improve her chances of leniency or sentence reductions. Let it go.